Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Baroness Nicholson 'cancelled' by Booker board

290 replies

BaronessSnippyPantsofCroneArmy · 25/06/2020 08:21

They will not rest until every disobedient woman is purged from society.

www.thebookseller.com/news/booker-prize-nicholson-barr-1207926

OP posts:
Z0rr0 · 25/06/2020 10:00

David Willetts has got a cheek, he's dodgy fecker. He had to resign a govt post for being found to have fudged evidence in the Cash for Questions inquiry.

THE Paymaster General, David Willetts, yesterday resigned from the Government following scathing criticism of his conduct by the Commons Standards and Privileges Committee.

Last night Quentin Davies, a Conservative member of the committee, said that his evidence to them was ``either obfuscation or avoidance'' and he was sorry that the former Minister was continuing to insist that he had told the truth.

The committee found that when a Government Whip, Mr Willetts - a rising star of the Tory party - had sought to influence an investigation into cash for questions involving former Minister Neil Hamilton by another committee of the House.

Even more damningly, the committee said that he had ``substantially aggravated the original offence'' by giving evidence to them which they could not accept as accurate.

And in the past he blamed feminism for preventing social mobility: In June 2011, Willetts said during the launch of the Government's social mobility strategy that movement between the classes had "stagnated" over the past 40 years, and Willetts attributed this partly to the entry of women into the workplace and universities for the lack of progress for men. "Feminism trumped egalitarianism", he said, adding that women who would otherwise have been housewives had taken university places and well-paid jobs that could have gone to ambitious working-class men.

doublehalo · 25/06/2020 09:57

"We have today decided that these titles and roles should, with immediate effect, cease to exist. Those holding them have been informed and thanked for their longstanding interest."

I'd like to see the list of all the other's who've also lost their honorary positions. Anyone have any ideas?

Igneococcus · 25/06/2020 09:53

There is a not quite up to date article in the Times but I can't seem to get a share token at the moment:

www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/booker-boss-baroness-nicholson-of-winterbourne-attacked-as-homophobic-37h3ttvwk

Beamur · 25/06/2020 09:51

I don't know the rationale behind the vote made by the Baroness, but I do know several gay people who were actually very unhappy about gay marriage. They considered it to be not such a good thing to ape heteronormativity. So, there will have been people who are gay/support gay rights who did not agree with legislating for this. Doesn't mean automatically that you are a bigoted meanie.

SarahTancredi · 25/06/2020 09:50
Hmm

Gay marriage hasnt even been legal that long and therfir must have had multiple people vote against it for years but now it's her that's a problem and only now?

How dare women have opinions hey. WE SEE YOU!!

JemimaShore · 25/06/2020 09:49

There is so much to unpick here.

Firstly, more than a few MPs / Lords voted against same sex marriage. I don't agree with them - I was very pleased to see it introduced. But as I understand it was largely due to religious beliefs? It certainly seems to be in Baroness Nicholson's case.

Secondly, as one MP on twitter said - the matter is settled. It's no longer up for debate, and MPs/Lords voted in line with their conscience at the time. Nobody is leading a campaign to have same sex marriage cancelled!

So - why Baroness Nicholson, and why now?

Because she's spoken up for JK Rowling, and for women, and is actively campaigning for women/women's only spaces. And she's a woman with considerable power.

So they're punishing her.

merrymouse · 25/06/2020 09:45

Originally it was set up to be financed by the royalties of best selling authors such as Ian Fleming and Agatha Christie.

Financed by Fleming and Christie! Really its a wonder that any author admits to having won the Booker Prize!

RoyalCorgi · 25/06/2020 09:43

Agree that this is an expression of the rage at being unable to cancel JK Rowling. They absolutely hate uppity women. Sacking Emma Nicholson is a message to the rest of us to stay in line.

The Kenan Malik article about Rushdie is very good, merrymouse - he's always worth reading.

merrymouse · 25/06/2020 09:42

The subject of gay marriage in the UK is complicated by the fact that Civil Partnerships have been legal since 2004, so when somebody says they are or were against 'same sex marriage', it's not clear what they mean or meant, and it probably can't be made clear in a tweet.

It's really not clear why this vote has suddenly become an issue now, or what the link is between having an opinion on marriage, and having an opinion on whether its possible to change sex.

If nothing else the people who organise the Booker Prize should be able to come up with a more intellectually rigorous explanation than 'somebody was guilty of wrong think on twitter'.

If they can't, they should be judging less challenging books.

JustHereWithMyPopcorn · 25/06/2020 09:39

I assume that they will be reviewing the political and ideological views of all authors before considering who to give the ongoing prizes too. No authors with wrong think allowed. And also apply this retrospectively and remove awards for anyone who may have done or said anything in their past that the mob thinks they should be cancelled for.

Beamur · 25/06/2020 09:33

Well, how feeble of them.
McCarthyism indeed.
Be very very careful what you facilitate with authoritarian behaviour like this!
I'm assuming that the Trustees have examined every decision, every vote, every tweet they have made in the last 10-20 years and are confident that they have always said and done the right thing for the pure and woke world of today. If not, I won't have much sympathy when they too get hauled over by the moral judgement of the minority and are 'cancelled' or made to abjectly apologise and pledge to 'do better'.

ChattyLion · 25/06/2020 09:32

OMG the stinking hypocrisy of them sacking her.
I am indebted to her for her action on this issue given the circles she moves in she can make a difference and the TRAs know that.
I don’t have to agree with her on everything and I don’t.

Same with ‘Two brains’ Willetts. Lots of ideas that you’d be a bit disappointed in someone with one brain having. But actually intergenerational fairness is a useful way to look at structural level society level problems like the economy, environment, education and he has served a public good by banging that drum in the Tories. I don’t care that he didn’t think it up.

Lamahaha · 25/06/2020 09:24

^^ should be, "the estates of best selling authors..."

Lamahaha · 25/06/2020 09:23

@bloodyhamabeads

Who sponsors the Booker Prize?
Originally it was set up to be financed by the royalties of best selling authors such as Ian Fleming and Agatha Christie. I'm not sure if that still holds good. Later on it was co-sponsored by a couple of businesses such as Iceland. But I just googled this:

"Silicon Valley billionaire, philanthropist and author Michael Moritz and his wife Harriet Heyman's charitable foundation has been announced as the new sponsor of the Booker prize, a month after the Man Group revealed it was ending its 18-year sponsorship of the prestigious award for literary fiction."

Methinks a billionaire sponsor from very woke Silicon Valley might have had a little word...

SorryAuntLydia · 25/06/2020 09:22

@ScrimpshawTheSecond

Ah, sorry, wrong list, I think. This is the Trustees:

The trustees of The Booker Prize Foundation are:

Chaired by Mark Damazer
Nick Barley – Director of Edinburgh International Book Festival
Bidisha SK Mamata – writer, critic and broadcaster
Carol Lake – Managing Director, Philanthropy Executive at JPMorgan Chase
James Naughtie – broadcaster
Ben Okri - poet and author
Professor Louise Richardson – Vice Chancellor of the University of Oxford
The Rt Hon. Lord David Willetts – writer, ex-minister and advocate of fairness between the generations</div></div>

So I guess the Booker Committee might want to sack David Willetts too...

1998 voted against lowering the age of consent for homosexuals to match that of heterosexuals
2002 voted against allowing gay people to adopt children

justanotherneighinparadise · 25/06/2020 09:21

@Onestepup

"Literature is open, plural and questioning."

The irony...

I have to say I thought exactly the same 🙄
teawamutu · 25/06/2020 09:20

@MoltenLasagne

Does anyone else get the impression that they went after Baronness Nicholson because they hadn't managed to cancel JKR?
Oh yes. Just a bit.
rogdmum · 25/06/2020 09:15

David Willets would be hard pushed to argue against the Baroness’ voting record given his own stick-to-party line:

www.theyworkforyou.com/divisions/pw-1998-06-22-311-commons/mp/10637

The mob came for them and they fell. What they failed to realise is that had they held strong, the mob would have eventually just moved onto their next target. Mind blowing.

Onestepup · 25/06/2020 09:15

"Literature is open, plural and questioning."

The irony...

ErrolTheDragon · 25/06/2020 09:13

'Diversity' probably doesn't include 78yo women, for some reason.

justanotherneighinparadise · 25/06/2020 09:13

Course they are going after her! She won’t capitulate to them. She’s also female, white, privileged and has right wing political leanings. There is literally no possibility for her to throw the victim card at anyone so it’s a home run. It’s like shooting a sparrow with a sawn off shotgun. The easiest target you could ever imagine.

bloodyhamabeads · 25/06/2020 09:11

Who sponsors the Booker Prize?

rogdmum · 25/06/2020 09:11

It’s disappointing to see Louise Richardson’s position here when previously she has appeared to be made of more robust stuff:

www.telegraph.co.uk/education/2017/09/05/oxford-student-union-offers-emotional-support-affected-vice/

dayoftheclownfish · 25/06/2020 09:10

It's also about the times we live in - truly McCarthyite.

transdimensional · 25/06/2020 09:08

She's a politician so of course she's going to have some controversial views. Has the Booker board only just noticed?
She opposed same-sex marriage in 2013. If this was about her views on same-sex marriage, she'd have been removed from her role 7 years ago.
(It's weird how gay rights were never considered beyond debate in the way that trans rights are. Indeed, Stonewall didn't even support same-sex marriage until late 2010; earlier that year, it had said it was neutral on the issue!)
So this isn't about her views on same-sex marriage. It's about the trans activists.